Agenda item

The report of the Chief Officer, Elections and Regulatory requests Members Consideration on an application to vary a premises licence held by Eri Red Sea Ltd. in relation to Eri Red Sea, 97 Roundhay Road, Leeds, LS8 5AQ.

The report of the Chief Officer Elections and Regulatory presented an application to vary a premises licence held by Eri Red Sea Ltd. in relation to Eri Red Sea, 97 Roundhay Road, Leeds, LS8 5AQ.

Present at the meeting were:

• Sue Duckworth – Entertainment Licensing Leeds City Council (LCC)
• Vanessa Holroyd – Environmental Protection Team LCC
• Emelia Slezak – Public Health LCC
• Councillor Salma Arif
• PC Neil Haywood WYP

There was no attendance by or on behalf of the Applicant.  The Applicant’s sole director was contacted by licensing officers, and this communication was reported to the Committee. The Director still did not attend the hearing and did not request that the hearing be adjourned.  After suggesting he could get to the hearing in 30 minutes, he subsequently informed officers that he would not be attending.

The Committee therefore had to decide whether to proceed with the hearing in the Applicant’s absence or to reschedule the hearing. The parties present all wished for the hearing to take place on the day.  Having regard to the provisions of Regulation 12(1) of the Licensing Act 2003 (Hearings) Regulations 2005 (“the Regulations”), the Committee did not consider it to be necessary for its consideration of the application for the hearing to be adjourned.  The Application was before them and it was clear what was being sought and why.  With regard to Regulation 20 of the Regulations, the Committee did not consider it to be in the public interest to adjourn the hearing.  There would be a cost to the Authority and the other attendees, no guarantee that the Applicant would arrange attendance if adjourned and the Director had ultimately indicated that he would not attend.  The Committee therefore decided unanimously to proceed in the Applicant’s absence.

The Legal Officer outlined the procedure for the meeting, noting that in the applicant’s absence, Members were to take the documentation provided in support of the application into consideration and that the objectors were to be allowed the 15 minutes per party to make their case to the Sub-Committee.

The Licensing Officer presented the application providing Members with the following points:

• The application proposed to extend the hours for the Sale by Retail of Alcohol and the hours the premises were open to the public.
• The application had attracted representations from Entertainment Licensing, EPT, Public Heath, WYP and all three Local Ward Councillors. The premises was also within the Harehills and Burmantofts Cumulative Impact Area (CIA).
• A copy of the existing licence was available at appendix A and a copy of the variation application form was available at appendix B. The application sought to extend Sale by Retail of Alcohol to Monday to Thursday 07:00 - 03:00 and Friday to Sunday 07:00 - 05:00 and also extend the hours the premises were open to the public to Monday to Thursday 07:00 - 03:00 and Friday to Sunday 07:00 - 05:00.
• Entertainment Licensing, EPT, Public Health, WYP, Councillors S Arif and A Ali and Councillor M Ali objections were detailed at appendix D, E, F, G, H, G and I, respectively.

The Objector addressed the Sub-Committee providing the following information:

Councillor S Arif

• Ward Members for Gipton and Harehills had objected to the original licence application at the hearing in April 2023 and maintained their position.
• Next door to the premises at 95 Roundhay Road was the Archway Resource Centre which was outlined to be a high value community asset, including provision of care services, youth activities and connecting young people to benefits and services.
• Archways conducted many activities and community events at various times of day and many that attend were young, vulnerable people from the local area so extending the licenced hours was to have a detrimental effect in exposing these people to alcohol use, with street drinking already prevalent within the area and was the reason the CIA was in place.
• Approval of the licence was outlined to be in contradiction of the licensing objective to protect children from harm and it was considered inappropriate to extend the hours when the area was already saturated with off licences.
• With the applicant not attending the hearing it was noted he was aware of the concerns and had disregard for the impact the extended hours would have on local residents.

WYP – PC Neil Haywood

• CIA policy held significant weight in this case and was in place to address alcohol related issues such as crime, anti-social behaviour and negative health impacts, all which would be exacerbated by extending the hours of operation at this premises.
• Access to alcohol needed to be limited across the CIA area and any increased availability added to the issues. The CIA was not a blanket ban on approving licenses but required mitigating circumstances to be outlined, with no mitigating circumstances or conditions proposed as part of the application.
• WYP had objected to the original application in April 2023. Although that licence had been approved, the hours applied for were reduced, so to approve the variation would be retracting from what was agreed.
• Although there were no specific incidents to reference, the applicant’s claim of exemplary management was doubted. Responsible authorities were limited by resource constraints to attend the premises regularly and track issues, however, any increase in sales or hours of operations would likely lead to an increase in anti-social and criminal incidents.
• The application was requested to be refused, given the lack of any mitigating circumstances provided in the application.

Sue Duckworth – Licensing Authority

• Point 7.45 of the Leeds Statement of Licensing Policy was referenced, and it was noted that the claim of exemplary management was a factor that the licensing authority will not consider as meeting the standard of rebuttal.
• With the hours reduced from the original licence application, it was illogical to then support an increase in extended hours, which were noted to be extensive, allowing 22 hours at the weekend for trading alcohol.
• There were many vulnerable children within the locality, with Gipton and Harehills having the 4^th highest rate for young people not taking up higher education, as well as a significant population of people under 16. Archways was a good institution for supporting vulnerable young people and should be supported.
• The applicant had provided no evidence for mitigating circumstances that were required as proof for lesser impact on the CIA.

Emelia Slezak – Public Health

• There was a correlation between addiction and the concentration of off licences in the area, with the CIA in place, as hard policy, to limit any further easy access of alcohol.
• The alcohol data matrix was used to detail city wide risks and Harehills north ranked 1 out of 107 for children under the age of 16, so this application posed significant risk against the licensing objective to protect children from harm.
• The high levels of addiction and street drinking in the area normalised heavy alcohol use to children. There were 16 childcare facilities and schools within the locality, and it was common for children to witness street drinking when commuting. There was a need to shift the social norms in areas where alcohol prevalence was high.
• As there was low take up rates for higher education in the area, it was noted that these young people were more at risk when exposed to addiction and street drinking. There were also reports of children experiencing trauma in the area which was often related to addiction and abuse.
• Archways was 89 feet away from the premises and had submitted a lengthy letter outlining their concerns, which had been kept confidential.
• Chapeltown GP Surgery was under 1 mile from the premises and had submitted a letter of objection to Public Health noting that a reduction in the availability of alcohol was an effective measure for safeguarding vulnerable people and the wellbeing of young people was a priority for Harehills.
• The Marmot City approach was referenced, with reducing health outcome inequalities being the leading action. A Marmot principle was to provide children with a good start to life, which complimented the licensing objective to reduce hard to children.
• Increasing the hours and availability of alcohol at the premises had negative effects on the local community, particularly for younger people, and it was requested that the application be refused.

Vanessa Holroyd – EPT

• Further availability of alcohol at later hours was to exacerbate already prevalent issues of public nuisance, street drinking, litter, public urination and anti-social behaviour.
• There were no mitigating circumstances proposed by the applicant and to allow 22 hours of alcohol sales at weekends was extreme and would have negative social impacts.
• It was difficult for EPT to prove statuary abuse related to the increased hours if the application was approved and relied on the Licensing Authority to monitor operations and related enforcement action.
• The applicant’s statement contained in the application form noting business limitations under the current licensed hours should not result in a huge increase and also to extend the hours would lead to increased deliveries at the premises which would also lead to disturbance to nearby residents.

In response to questions from Members the following points were noted:

• It was confirmed the objecting parties had not engaged with the applicant to propose mitigation measures as this was the responsibility of the applicant, made clear by CIA policy.
• The applicant had not contacted the Licensing Authority to discuss the application further than its submission and request for increased hours. No formal communication had been held to discuss how to improve the application and provide evidence for mitigating circumstances.
• There had been no engagement with EPT despite the lack of mitigating factors being outlined and contact details being provided. EPT were happy to meet with applicants to discuss applications.
• There had been no engagement with Elected Ward Members or Public Health, including Children’s Services.
• Councillors R Downes and S Hamilton were part of the Sub-Committee that had approved the original licence by split decision. Although the approval was lawful there had been concerns and the hours applied for had been reduced. There were also issues with a nearby store, M&S Off Licence which had been illegally selling nitrous oxide, adding to the difficulties faced within the locality.
• Members thanked the attendees for their submissions and outlined they understood the important work conducted at Archways and the risk the extended hours applied for by the premises posed.

RESOLVED – That the application be refused.